cityofheroesfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Jumping Jack
Welcome! Hello, , and welcome to the Paragon Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Feel free to fill out your personal user page so we can get to know you. There is a collection of Userboxes you can easily add there. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page or place on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Don't forget to drop by and introduce yourself in the Forum, which will use the same name/password that you used when you signed up with the wiki. If you ever feel the need to change your password, you will need to do so there instead of here in the wiki. And there's even a RSS Feed, if you're into that. Also, make sure you take a look at the . There is a lot of preloaded images, missions, and contact info, and what you want to add might already be there. Again, welcome! - Snorii 22:34, 17 October 2007 (EDT) =^^= Hii! Welcome to the madness! since it isn't in some of our more standard welcome msgs, I though I'd point out that you can get a hold of any of the Adim here through this page if you have any question about local policy, technicalities, or whatnot. Anyway, pls enjoy your time here!--Sleepy Kitty 13:24, 18 October 2007 (EDT) o.o well.. actually I think the only template for test jumping is here, we usually just use it and for most of that stuff.. if you want to import those other two clrs, feel free, just make sure they don't conflict with anything already here =^^= --Sleepy Kitty 22:51, 18 October 2007 (EDT) Image Categories Regarding Image Categories - No worries, putting them where you thought they should go is excellent. Mostly, I was just moving a few down to subcategories. Keep up the good work. :D - Snorii 09:20, 19 October 2007 (EDT) Dialup I would copy your dialup userbox to my page, but after three years of playing coh on dialup, I am now on dsl. - Snorii 09:23, 19 October 2007 (EDT) :Feel free to make a "Recovering Dialup user" userbox! :) --Jumping Jack 09:42, 19 October 2007 (EDT) Bases @.@ where to begin.. I guess with Category:Base Items By Type.. the text you have in that category page doesn't make sense, its a category, it sorts alphabetically, and doesn't let you sort things how ever you want to. Where you perhaps thinking of nested categories? dropping a Category:Control and Category:Power or such in and sorting from there? ^^ also, I don't know about the WoWWiki's handling of it, but Category pages are treated as folders here, and we usually only put brief descriptions of what the category is intended for on the cat's page section (random examples: Category:5th Column Images, Category:Blaster Secondary). That is to say, something brief (think notes in programing code for example) and we usually leave off the headlines and headers. o_o that said, for any of these folders/categories you make, please make sure to nest them in the proper parent folder =^^= --Sleepy Kitty 14:26, 19 October 2007 (EDT) :I do intend "Startup Base Items", "Workshop Base Items", etc, by the restrictions for what items can be placed in which rooms. That is, all items that are restricted as "workshops" go in the workshop base items category, etc. : :I have just put the first polish on , and intend to have the type entry automatically create a link to the item category. Similarly, having the BaseRoomBox provide links to categories that apply for particular lines in it. (IE, Oversight center would have lines linking to workshops, startup, storage.) : :True, usually the headlines are left off. I found an example amongst the template pages that was otherwise, so assumed that the occasional exception was useful. The headline in this case can be omitted, I think. --Jumping Jack 14:32, 19 October 2007 (EDT) ::o_o please please do not make a template here that auto adds a page to a category, those things are a pain and create awful category sprawl... :: ::Looking at that template.. it could use a bit of revision.. Name is pointless, the articles title will have it in there.. the Pic is better if its to the right hand side, and with the very wide range of base item dimensions, having it restricted by a template would be a bad thing. I'm assuming you will have the fields that have no data in them not show up? oh, Type is also not really needed as its determined by the page its on.. o.o actually, here, these are the two main formats that where mostly use when I created the base pages last year. All the fields you'd need should be on one of those two formats.--Sleepy Kitty 15:07, 19 October 2007 (EDT) :::I wasn't intending to use it to add a page to a category (though I've seen that be useful elsewhere), I was intending to add a link to the appropriate category of item, to the line in the room description. ... Of course the template could use revision. It was a first draft, I did say... :) However... ::: :::*Name - see , which I based this off of. To be honest, on other wikis, I've found the title of this sort of box to be a good touch, despite it being the page name. You've been here longer, though, and I can bow to your wishes. :::*Image - I guess we can try having the info box on the left and the pic on the right... Or have the pic follow the info box in a thumbnail? Again, I followed Infobox Contact for a guideline. Worst case, the pic can be removed and placed individually. *shrug* whatever works. :::*type - same argument. The fact it is in the "Energy Base Items" category doesn't mean that you'll actually look down to the bottom of the page and see that. And again, I'm easy, if you feel strongly about it. Also, it is optional... :::I also found , which had most of what I wanted, but didn't display it the way I wanted. I was hoping for something that better echoed the item info dialog in the GUI. ::: I eagerly await your further comments. --Jumping Jack 15:27, 19 October 2007 (EDT) o.o the for their use, are really good, unfortunately, base items are a whole different kettle of fish (tuna, if we're lucky). >.> Contacts have very large pages filled with mission information, background story.. their intro.. base items are just the information on their placement requirements, benefit, and description. Most base items don't even take up enough page room to really justify their own page, but we do it anyway. @.@ what I'm saying here is that while a box template is good, we want something like this pages, and not a right hand upper corner hugger. o_o and as previously mentioned base item pics should not be constrained by the box.. and here are two good examples as to why. Crystal Ball (floor stand version) and Ley Tap. o.o one is very very long (that isn't a very good pic there) and the other is very tall but slender. Properly taken pictures of both of them would require completely different dimensions to restrict them down and still look good. o.o reversely, contacts are usually human shaped, thus, similar in proportions and easy to have a fixed thumbnail of. :I'm certainly willing to let the base item pages remain unmolested by a "BaseItemBox" for now... Some of it, I suspect, would fall under "not invented here", but hey, I've enough to do right now. Perhaps also, I fell into bad company when I wandered into the base item realm. : :But Arcane seems, to me, to be a cautionary tale on how not to describe the decorative items. I don't think we'd be well served making individual pages for each decorative item, but I do think we need something better than that... (Thanks for pointing it my way, too!) : :Perhaps... a template that provides a thumb-like box, but has a field for price, and an optional one for issue, perhaps, both to be displayed at the bottom, the name in small print either at top or bottom? --Jumping Jack 15:57, 19 October 2007 (EDT) Base Pictures o,o wanted to tap you on the shoulder before you went to far but.. lets add those pics to cats based on what tab their under.. so for those chairs, it would be Category:Base Chair Images, which would be a sub cat of Category:Purchased Base Items Images. --Sleepy Kitty 16:52, 20 October 2007 (EDT) :Holding off for a moment. I wanted to create larger categories, since most folks won't be looking at *these* categories. :* Furniture: chairs, cabinets, desks :* Lighting :* Themed: arcane, tech, sewer, etc :* other? :* don't much like the Purchased base item category, as almost everything falls under that. If you like, perhaps as a side category (see below). :* also: Functional (workshops, control, energy, etc) :Either subdivide funtional into "crafted/salvage" (either name works) and "purchased", or put the images into two categories (functional and crafted or purchased). : :I'm'a gonna lay low for like 15 minutes here and let you reply and/or categorize images. By default, I'll put the chairs into furniture unless you've moved them yourself or given direction. : :other categories for another day. --Jumping Jack 16:58, 20 October 2007 (EDT) ::>.> there's another and much more pressing reason to group these by their natural categories.. some poor smuck is going to have to go through all 400+ base item pictures and match all of them.. thats one horrific seek time per image.. ::o.o you want to create a larger category for images? or for base items themselves? for images, there isn't a reason too since this sort of thing is back end and only the editors usually see it, not the common browser. If you mean for the items themselve.. lets take this to the forums then, as it'll get complicated fast. --Sleepy Kitty 17:03, 20 October 2007 (EDT) :::Images only. Didn't think that a 24-image category was so very nifty. But note that the names I have chosen will sort by category. ... assuming we can keep to that scheme. I can be satisfied by "chair", "Cabinet", "Desk" categories, but thought them puny. And recognized right off that no, didn't want ALL base items in one lump. Or even all decorative. Or even all themed items... there are a LOT of Arcane, Tech, Sewer images. :::"Larger category" - lumping several of the smaller tabs together, but leaving separate categories for the larger tabs. :::Lighting should be in a separate tab regardless (which fits your scheme anyway), as placing them requires different gymnastics. :::I am trying to maintain a common "distance to object" to provide comparable sizes. Works fair with the chairs and cabinets at least. Arcane may blow me away, though. Some of that stuff is HUGE! --17:09, 20 October 2007 (EDT) ::::o.o part of the worry on this is about the amount of seeking that would be required for adding the images in, the other part is, the devs have been promising to overhaul and update the bases for well over a year now. I know office furniture is likely to be left untouched, but there's a decent chance that what is a 20 picture category now will turn into a 50 one in issue 12. ^^ since I'm the Admin nominally in charge of base thingies, I'm suppose to worry about this sort of thing, even if it is kinda silly. --Sleepy Kitty 17:37, 20 October 2007 (EDT) *!* Good reasons, both. Feel free to delete Furniture Base Item Images Cat as unused for now. We can always recreate it later if needed. Please also examine and enhance . Used it for one item so far for Chairs. A variant (say, SimpleBI_V) might be more useful for putting stuff underneath a picture than trying to add an additional param to SimpleBI. And I think that highly landscape images will probably be better with stuff underneath. --Jumping Jack 17:42, 20 October 2007 (EDT) :o,o just left a comment on it.. but now that I think about it, if we're going to use it for various decor related things, there are two fields it should also have in addition to the description one I mentioned.. some base items allow objects on them, as in, they have "stackable" properties.. and also, you have semi randomly, items that go on walls, they should be marked as such. you'll see it once you look at the cabinets section, but I though I should bring it up now. All the info on which items are which is already in, I spent a day testing each and every one last yr ^^;; anyway, since these two fields are oddballs, they should probably not be seen unless they have text, while the price/issue added/description ones should be on all of them. --Sleepy Kitty 17:48, 20 October 2007 (EDT) Story Arc Template You mentioned in the forums about enemy icon images in the StoryArc template. Now: Revised: Tsoo Shenanigans : Moving things into a table will let you manage margins like you suggested in the forums. I'm not all that experienced with templates at the moment, but maybe you could take the markup of my above revision and modify the StoryArc template to account for it. --GuyPerfect 19:44, 26 October 2007 (EDT) : I can try, Guy, but when it comes to templates, I'm just a poseur... By the by... New category: Category:Requests for comments, with a template . What ya think? --Jumping Jack 19:49, 26 October 2007 (EDT) Template template Just noticed Template:T and Template:Tlink. Don't feel bad. I created a template-template when I showed up here, too, and it ended up getting canned, too. You're not alone! :) By the way -- welcome to the wiki. ^^ -- Sekoia 22:23, 26 October 2007 (EDT) BASEic fun o,o I've noticed you do this a couple times now, so I though I should warn you before the formatting police notice. Wiki policy here forbids the use of wiki-links in any headers. I went and removed a couple that you've added, but if there are ones I've missed, please swap them out. >.> on and on the topic of this ones header, I noticed that you've swapped things on a few base items. The item descriptions go under Description and the overview of the item, basic info in text and such, should be in the Overview . o,o I do sorta like the italics you used for the descriptions though.. so we might universally swap to those soon. --Sleepy Kitty 01:34, 11 November 2007 (EST) :I swapped to using the text from the UI as the overview (or the intro to the overview) because ... well, it did kinda give you a summary of what the item is supposed to do, right? To me, 'overview' and 'description' mean "short summary" and "detailed information". How did the "short summary" morph into "the detailed information" and vice versa? : :That reversal is why you have an "additional Information" section at all. And really, that additional information section seemed kinda silly to me, with my opinions of Overview and Description. : :Links in headers... I'll follow the policy, but please do tell me: why is it policy? --Jumping Jack 19:07, 12 November 2007 (EST) :: The "no links in headers" policy is pretty universal across most Mediawiki wikis (including Wikipedia). There are three reasons I can think of off the top of my head. First, usability: users are generally accustomed to finding links in the text of a page, not in the headings. Given widespread adherence to the "no links in headings" policy across Mediawiki-based projects, this is even more true for such projects. When you do find links in headings on various websites out there, they have unpredictable behavior: some take you back up to a Table of Contents, some take you to another page, and some are merely links to themselves (with anchors, presumably to make linking to the section easier). Thus, links in headers is bad from a usability standpoint because that's not where users will expect to find such links--they expect to find them in the text; and because users don't know what to expect when they see a link in the header, thanks to a lack of widespread usage or uniformity of such links. Second, aesthetics: putting links in headers changes the look of the page such that those particular headers look substantially different from other headers. This practice provides no net benefits (it harms more than it helps, see usability above), so why make the page look mottled? It looks better when all headers have the same format; plus, that uniformity and predictability helps build back into usability. Third, compatibility: some browsers will not render links in headers properly. I don't know which those browsers are, though; I found that reference on another website in regards to why they request no links in headers. Anyway, that was a very long answer to a simple question, hopefully I didn't give you more than you want. o.o If you want to see where the policy initiated for us, the thread is here: http://paragonwiki.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3#3 :: :: Regarding the base items stuff... Taking a look at http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Resurrection_Circle&oldid=72087 compared to http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Resurrection_Circle&oldid=72250 -- I like Jumping Jack's version better, for the reasons he gave. I see why Sleepy's doing it the way she's doing it -- because to her "Description" means "in game description". But I think Jack's version is more intuitive. Just my two cents, anyway. -- Sekoia 20:04, 12 November 2007 (EST) :: :: Actually, looking at badges, they use "Description" the same way, and there it makes sense. So grr. There is value in having the in-game description in a section of it's own. If you can think of a better title for the in-game description rather than just "Description", that might help some. I personally can't think of anything. >.< -- Sekoia 20:08, 12 November 2007 (EST) ::: Links: Of the arguments you mention, the one that holds the most weight with me is the "some browsers don't render them properly". For the other arguments... meh. I can get by with alternatives, so my opinions on them aren't important. :::Badges: note that those pages do not also have an 'overview' section. That may suggest a solution. --Jumping Jack 20:25, 12 November 2007 (EST) ::::o,o the overview is there because.. err.. well, I almost always start an article that way, and overview covers most naming needs for the intro section to a page.. So its the custom, not the rule. ^^ and the reason I have the base items descriptions section named descriptions is.. err.. it sounds better than "info" which is what the base editor uses. And yes, while on most of the power, control, medical, etc items have for their info stuff that works well in the overview as basic info, some of it, and most of the decor ones have silliness. Take the Bonfire for instance its info text is: "Fire good! And it heats too." o.o thats the silliest one of the things in the room with me right now, but there are some that are VERY silly. And since we wanted to have the exact text in the article, and information about what the item is and can be used for, the two where kept seperated =^^= --Sleepy Kitty 21:25, 12 November 2007 (EST)